linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/29] context_tracking,x86: Defer some IPIs until a user->kernel transition

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <xhsmh8qgk5txe.mognet@vschneid-thinkpadt14sgen2i.remote.csb>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2025 17:24:29 +0100
From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave
 Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Josh Poimboeuf
 <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann
 <arnd@...db.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Jason Baron
 <jbaron@...mai.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ard Biesheuvel
 <ardb@...nel.org>, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, "David S.
 Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Neeraj Upadhyay
 <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, Josh
 Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
 Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers
 <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Andrew
 Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Masahiro Yamada
 <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Han Shen <shenhan@...gle.com>, Rik van Riel
 <riel@...riel.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Dan Carpenter
 <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli
 <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>, Yair
 Podemsky <ypodemsk@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
 Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/29] context_tracking,x86: Defer some IPIs until a
 user->kernel transition

On 29/10/25 18:15, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Le Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 11:32:58AM +0100, Valentin Schneider a écrit :
>> I need to have a think about that one; one pain point I see is the context
>> tracking work has to be NMI safe since e.g. an NMI can take us out of
>> userspace. Another is that NOHZ-full CPUs need to be special cased in the
>> stop machine queueing / completion.
>>
>> /me goes fetch a new notebook
>
> Something like the below (untested) ?
>

Some minor nits below but otherwise that looks promising.

One problem I'm having however is reasoning about the danger zone; what
forbidden actions could a NO_HZ_FULL CPU take when entering the kernel
while take_cpu_down() is happening?

I'm actually not familiar with why we actually use stop_machine() for CPU
hotplug; I see things like CPUHP_AP_SMPCFD_DYING::smpcfd_dying_cpu() or
CPUHP_AP_TICK_DYING::tick_cpu_dying() expect other CPUs to be patiently
spinning in multi_cpu_stop(), and I *think* nothing in the entry code up to
context_tracking entry would disrupt that, but it's not a small thing to
reason about.

AFAICT we need to reason about every .teardown callback from
CPUHP_TEARDOWN_CPU to CPUHP_AP_OFFLINE and their explicit & implicit
dependencies on other CPUs being STOP'd.

> @@ -176,6 +177,68 @@ struct multi_stop_data {
>       atomic_t		thread_ack;
>  };
>
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, stop_machine_poll);
> +
> +void stop_machine_poll_wait(void)

That needs to be noinstr, and AFAICT there's no problem with doing just that.

> +{
> +	int *poll = this_cpu_ptr(&stop_machine_poll);
> +
> +	while (*poll)
> +		cpu_relax();
> +	/* Enforce the work in stop machine to be visible */
> +	smp_mb();
> +}
> +
> +static void stop_machine_poll_start(struct multi_stop_data *msdata)
> +{
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	if (housekeeping_enabled(HK_TYPE_KERNEL_NOISE))

I think that wants a negation

> +		return;
> +
> +	/* Random target can't be known in advance */
> +	if (!msdata->active_cpus)
> +		return;